Krugman: Third Depression Watch

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Good, you made it that far. Now answer the question... when you are headed up in general, do you ever go down momentarily even though in general you are going up?



ok.... so it seems to YOU.... great, glad we got that resolved. I will go with the OVERALL numbers. Yes, you cherry picked a few... thanks... you got me, it was more than one. But in general they have been TRENDING (you know... that GENERAL direction you were talking about) UP.

My economics degree vs. your ambulance chasing skills.... yeah... I would put money on the fact that I understand more about economics than you.

anyone who is that anal with an analogy is not very intelligent. the analogy about a mountain is a simple one and has been used for decades if not longer.....it is a simple "up" and "down" analogy. if the common analogy isn't clear enough for you, the context should be clear to anyone with a four degree....even someone who scraped by with an econ degree.....if you don't have a masters in econ....i wouldn't be running around touting how smart you are due to your degree.

thanks for admitting you were wrong and that i didn't cherry pick one...there are more than one and on a whole, given housing is LARGE, the overall trend is downward. if you have a source that shows otherwise....i would like to see it. if you can convince me, i'll change my mind SF. but so far, you are doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing....because it seems to YOU

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

You really have a terrible time admitting it when you're wrong...

when have you admitted you're wrong on this board?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Right. So basically either I "want" it to be bad, or I agree with you.

Stupid. Just flat stupid. Can you point to one post of mine that said we should use "just tax cuts"? (I'll give you a hint, I haven't said it so the post won't be there).

And if you agree with Keynes then why are you not insisting that the stimulus money be spent solely on infrastructure? Keynes theory is that it doesn't matter where it is spent so long as it is on INFRASTRUCTURE. That last word is the important bit. Shovel ready jobs, remember how they weren't there? Most of us do.

I hope beyond measure that we get past this in spite of the ineffective "stimulus" and we do well. Even if it means the republicans lose the White House for another four years.

No, Keynes argued that any form of consumption will do the job. Spending on infrastructure just has long term benefits as well. Friedman showed that most crises can be solved with monetary policy alone, though.

 

[Rune]

projecting again....i do know...you don't. you can't give a single cite and all you do is mock those who do. those who give citations you call them stupid and ignorant on the economy. yet you offer nothing but your opinion as proof.

i know you believe you're smarter than everyone and don't need evidence or facts to back up your opinion, but really, i wouldn't be running around telling others they shouldn't inject themselves into the discussion when you offer nothing but opinion...i mean you even ridiculed SF and he knows a lot more about about the economy than you do.

Can't we?

 

[Damocles]

No, Keynes argued that any form of consumption will do the job. Spending on infrastructure just has long term benefits as well. Friedman showed that most crises can be solved with monetary policy alone, though.

So you subscribe to the Chicago Economic Theory? Interesting.

This is not the current economic theory being espoused by the government. In fact, we hear consistently on this site from lefties that it "failed" and that far more government control is needed.

Friedman assumed rational action by government, as well as by companies the problem was the government control part. We had government inducing a credit bubble, and companies who could create debt and pass it on to the government in the form of bundled over-rated loans sold to companies controlled and guaranteed by the government. Rational action by a company who could make money without the responsibility? Well, obviously, do it repeatedly and often!

We created our own bubble, ready to burst, then when it did all we did was throw a patch on that balloon and begin to reinflate it.

Current economic policy absolutely isn't following Friedman, the idea is almost laughable. Shoot when we said we were following his theory, we still over used government control, especially in the arena of mortgages. Banks would actually be sanctioned for not following the irrational pattern that created the debt crisis. The idea that we should absolve government, recreate the exact same policy, and add still more debt will get us out of the problem assumes an ignorance of the root cause of the problem to begin with.

Current policy is clearly Keynsian, without the rationality of that theory as well. Spend freely in down times on stuff we will need to spend on the future anyway, but pay it down during good times... In this case we ignore the part where we should be spending on things we will need to spend on in the future anyway, and we've never followed the "good times" part where we actually lower the debt...

We've never followed either of these theories, not since 1962. We've flirted with a mix of both playing with regulation to the detriment of both theories of economics.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"drives" up? we were talking about walking up...mr. arm chair outdoor guy

arm chair? See now you are showing just how desperate you are.

stupid bean counter...you're describing switchbacks....be it a marked trail or a blazed trail

you don't get out much do you

Um... no dear yurtle, I am not describing switchbacks. As I stated, and YOU just confirmed, it is a TRAIL. It is something man has used to form roads, trails and railroads as a means to get over steep terrain.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

anyone who is that anal with an analogy is not very intelligent. the analogy about a mountain is a simple one and has been used for decades if not longer.....it is a simple "up" and "down" analogy. if the common analogy isn't clear enough for you, the context should be clear to anyone with a four degree....even someone who scraped by with an econ degree.....if you don't have a masters in econ....i wouldn't be running around touting how smart you are due to your degree.

Anyone who tries to simplify a mountain climb to simply 'up/down' is an idiot and knows little about climbing. Which given your lack of understanding with regards to economics is not too much of a shock that you wish to cling to your idiocy.

Tell me genius, if the stock market has a down day, do you use this same stupid analogy to proclaim the market is crashing?

thanks for admitting you were wrong and that i didn't cherry pick one...there are more than one and on a whole, given housing is LARGE, the overall trend is downward. if you have a source that shows otherwise....i would like to see it. if you can convince me, i'll change my mind SF. but so far, you are doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing....because it seems to YOU

Take a look at the numbers from your own link dipshit. Compare housing starts from six months ago to three months ago and then again to today. What does it say?

Take a look at ALL of the numbers from your own link.... compare the six months ago numbers to three months ago.... How many were better three months ago than they were six months ago?

Now.... take a look at the articles here..... http://www.ttnews.com/articles/basetemplate.aspx?storyid=26141

Note the headlines of them....

© 2010, Transport Topics Publishing Group. All rights reserved. RELATED ARTICLES
Leading Indicators Fall in April (5/19/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Grow 0.4% (4/21/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Improve 0.8% (3/18/2011 8:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Rise for Seventh Month (2/17/2011 10:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Jump in December (1/20/2011 10:15:00 AM)


Now.... Do shut the hell up

 

[DamnYankee]

Basically Keynes said that say, spending in Iraq wouldn't help resolve this. His goal was getting money into people's pockets to spend, hence watching one guy dig a hole, then filling that hole in... while it isn't effective infrastructure spending it is still spending on infrastructure. His theory was to get money into the economy, and that the best way to do it was to employ people who would spend that money.

In some ways I can see how that can work, but I can also see that spending a ton of cash to get only 50 people employed to attempt to create something to make... well, isn't effective. Better to get them working on digging holes, more people get employed, it has better effect and you have to pay an equal amount of people to fill those holes back in.

Better yet to give tax breaks and reduce regulatory costs and burden to folks who can decide for themselves where they want to dig the holes and for what purpose. That way one person will fill the hole with a fence post, perhaps to manage a farm, or deepen the hole to make a well, or drill a hole for natural gas or petroleum. Either way, most folks who dig a hole will do so for some entrepreneurial reason in an attempt to build wealth for themselves, and when it does get built will be paying taxes on that income.

It's retarded to think that digging a hole to have something for a second person to fill in is a legitimate purpose and can "jump start" an economy.

 

[Bfgrn]

wait....i thought economic factors were trending up

Things may be trending up for Wall Street, but not for main street. For every 5 Americans who lost his or her job due to the economic crash, there is ONE job opening. And that doesn't even factor in rate of pay.

FDR and New Deal Democrats.

The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York's Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown.

It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country's entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock.

In other words, millions of men and women earned a living wage and self-respect and contributed mightily to the national infrastructure.

A Works Progress Administration (WPA) or Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), or any other of Roosevelt's popular New Deal workfare programs would never stand a chance of being created in today's America...you right wing conspiracy theorists would be screaming that it is the slippery slope to brown shirts and the Hitler youth. ref

 

[DamnYankee]

Things may be trending up for Wall Street, but not for main street. For every 5 Americans who lost his or her job due to the economic crash, there is ONE job opening. And that doesn't even factor in rate of pay.

FDR and New Deal Democrats.

The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York's Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown.

It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country's entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock.

In other words, millions of men and women earned a living wage and self-respect and contributed mightily to the national infrastructure.

A Works Progress Administration (WPA) or Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), or any other of Roosevelt's popular New Deal workfare programs would never stand a chance of being created in today's America...you right wing conspiracy theorists would be screaming that it is the slippery slope to brown shirts and the Hitler youth. ref

In doing so FDR extended the Great Depression. It wasn't until The UK started paying American private corporations for manufactured war material that we finally climbed out of FDR's hole.

If FDR had let private people decide for themselves where capital investments should be made the crash of '29 would have been a blip instead of a long, painful depression.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Things may be trending up for Wall Street, but not for main street. For every 5 Americans who lost his or her job due to the economic crash, there is ONE job opening. And that doesn't even factor in rate of pay.

do you think onceler will come along and attack you for being dumb and not knowing what a trend is? doubt it...you're on the same political side as he is.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

arm chair? See now you are showing just how desperate you are.



Um... no dear yurtle, I am not describing switchbacks. As I stated, and YOU just confirmed, it is a TRAIL. It is something man has used to form roads, trails and railroads as a means to get over steep terrain.

wtf? do you even understand what you're talking about? you're confused.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Anyone who tries to simplify a mountain climb to simply 'up/down' is an idiot and knows little about climbing. Which given your lack of understanding with regards to economics is not too much of a shock that you wish to cling to your idiocy.

Tell me genius, if the stock market has a down day, do you use this same stupid analogy to proclaim the market is crashing?



Take a look at the numbers from your own link dipshit. Compare housing starts from six months ago to three months ago and then again to today. What does it say?

Take a look at ALL of the numbers from your own link.... compare the six months ago numbers to three months ago.... How many were better three months ago than they were six months ago?

Now.... take a look at the articles here..... http://www.ttnews.com/articles/basetemplate.aspx?storyid=26141

Note the headlines of them....

© 2010, Transport Topics Publishing Group. All rights reserved. RELATED ARTICLES
Leading Indicators Fall in April (5/19/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Grow 0.4% (4/21/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Improve 0.8% (3/18/2011 8:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Rise for Seventh Month (2/17/2011 10:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Jump in December (1/20/2011 10:15:00 AM)


Now.... Do shut the hell up

does my link say housing is an up or down indicator for the past three months? you're twisting as usual.

thank for the other links, it appears that most do say the overall indicators are up. thanks SF. even if you are superanal about analogies, you're not a half bad guy for an armchair weekend warrior

 

[Bfgrn]

In doing so FDR extended the Great Depression. It wasn't until The UK started paying American private corporations for manufactured war material that we finally climbed out of FDR's hole.

If FDR had let private people decide for themselves where capital investments should be made the crash of '29 would have been a blip instead of a long, painful depression.

Stick your ignorant Faux News right wing revisionism parrot squawking up your ass, there's PLENTY of room.

FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really?

Upon deeper examination, I discovered that the right bases its New Deal revisionism on the short-lived recession in a year straddling 1937 and 1938.
But that was four years into Roosevelt's term — four years marked by spectacular economic growth. Additionally, the fleeting decline happened not because of the New Deal's spending programs, but because Roosevelt momentarily listened to conservatives and backed off them. As Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman notes, in 1937-38, FDR "was persuaded to balance the budget" and "cut spending and the economy went back down again."

To be sure, you can credibly argue that the New Deal had its share of problems. But overall, the numbers prove it helped — rather than hurt — the macroeconomy. "Excepting 1937-1938, unemployment fell each year of Roosevelt's first two terms (while) the U.S. economy grew at average annual growth rates of 9 percent to 10 percent," writes University of California historian Eric Rauchway.

What about the New Deal's most "massive government intervention" — its financial regulations? Did they prolong the Great Depression in ways the official data didn't detect?

Nope.

According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, "Only with the New Deal's rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression." In fact, even famed conservative economist Milton Friedman admitted that the New Deal's Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was "the structural change most conducive to monetary stability since ... the Civil War."

OK — if the verifiable evidence proves the New Deal did not prolong the Depression, what about historians — do they "pretty much agree" on the opposite?

Again, no.

As Newsweek's Daniel Gross reports, "One would be very hard-pressed to find a serious professional historian who believes that the New Deal prolonged the Depression."

Hey Poly want a cracker...the Bush tax cuts for the 'job creators' has been in effect for a decade...a LOST decade with ZERO job growth...maybe the elite 'job creators' are waiting for all you right wing morons to suck their dicks...

 

[Onceler]

lol....onceler still thinks the indicators are up....i guess it is easy to be delusional because he ignores all the cites given to him by other posters that show he is wrong.

Kind of a funny response in retrospect...

 

[DamnYankee]

Stick your ignorant Faux News right wing revisionism parrot squawking up your ass, there's PLENTY of room.

FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really?

Upon deeper examination, I discovered that the right bases its New Deal revisionism on the short-lived recession in a year straddling 1937 and 1938.
But that was four years into Roosevelt's term — four years marked by spectacular economic growth. Additionally, the fleeting decline happened not because of the New Deal's spending programs, but because Roosevelt momentarily listened to conservatives and backed off them. As Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman notes, in 1937-38, FDR "was persuaded to balance the budget" and "cut spending and the economy went back down again."

To be sure, you can credibly argue that the New Deal had its share of problems. But overall, the numbers prove it helped — rather than hurt — the macroeconomy. "Excepting 1937-1938, unemployment fell each year of Roosevelt's first two terms (while) the U.S. economy grew at average annual growth rates of 9 percent to 10 percent," writes University of California historian Eric Rauchway.

What about the New Deal's most "massive government intervention" — its financial regulations? Did they prolong the Great Depression in ways the official data didn't detect?

Nope.

According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, "Only with the New Deal's rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression." In fact, even famed conservative economist Milton Friedman admitted that the New Deal's Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was "the structural change most conducive to monetary stability since ... the Civil War."

OK — if the verifiable evidence proves the New Deal did not prolong the Depression, what about historians — do they "pretty much agree" on the opposite?

Again, no.

As Newsweek's Daniel Gross reports, "One would be very hard-pressed to find a serious professional historian who believes that the New Deal prolonged the Depression."

Hey Poly want a cracker...the Bush tax cuts for the 'job creators' has been in effect for a decade...a LOST decade with ZERO job growth...maybe the elite 'job creators' are waiting for all you right wing morons to suck their dicks...

LOL You can't debate facts so you insult me then cite other's opinion. Epic FAIL on your part.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

does my link say housing is an up or down indicator for the past three months? you're twisting as usual.

What exactly am I twisting yurt? Oncelor said the trend was up for six months. You rejected that. Your own link shows that over the past six months there was improvement.... DESPITE the most recent month itself being negative. As for housing... as I stated, you are cherry picking. The articles I posted to show you the LEADING INDICATORS OVERALL have been POSITIVE just as Oncelor said. Pointing to one that has been down for three months (hence changing the time frame) is irrelevant to his point. The fact of the matter is that over the SIX month time frame he mentioned, even housing is better than it was.... despite the past three months for that ONE indicator.

thank for the other links, it appears that most do say the overall indicators are up. thanks SF. even if you are superanal about analogies, you're not a half bad guy for an armchair weekend warrior

Correcting an obvious error is not being anal Yurt. It was a seriously flawed analogy.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

What exactly am I twisting yurt? Oncelor said the trend was up for six months. You rejected that. Your own link shows that over the past six months there was improvement.... DESPITE the most recent month itself being negative. As for housing... as I stated, you are cherry picking. The articles I posted to show you the LEADING INDICATORS OVERALL have been POSITIVE just as Oncelor said. Pointing to one that has been down for three months (hence changing the time frame) is irrelevant to his point. The fact of the matter is that over the SIX month time frame he mentioned, even housing is better than it was.... despite the past three months for that ONE indicator.



Correcting an obvious error is not being anal Yurt. It was a seriously flawed analogy.

and here you're twisting again...i even underlined the part of my links that said the TREND was downward, housing being a LARGE part. but you want to ignore that and now twist what my links said because you're getting desperate. you are anal....the analogy is an up and down analogy. that is it and you know it. apparently your silly alleged econ degree didn't teach you that analogy are NOT LITERAL. idiot.

 

[Bfgrn]

LOL You can't debate facts so you insult me then cite other's opinion. Epic FAIL on your part.

You can't do anything but parrot ignorant right wing talking points you hear on Faux propaganda channel. Bring me proof of your bullshit. Because I don't believe YOU. I want documentation.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

and here you're twisting again...i even underlined the part of my links that said the TREND was downward, housing being a LARGE part. but you want to ignore that and now twist what my links said because you're getting desperate. you are anal....the analogy is an up and down analogy. that is it and you know it. apparently your silly alleged econ degree didn't teach you that analogy are NOT LITERAL. idiot.

Try reading your own link you ignorant little hack. It says GDP has trended downward. AGAIN you are fucking cherry picking data. AGAIN.... look at the sum total moron.... month after month the LEI's OVERALL were UP. You fucking half wit.

I love how you now mock my economics background when it proves YOU wrong. But when you THOUGHT I was agreeing with you I 'knew a lot'.

and AGAIN... your analogy is flawed.... you pretended that the TREND had changed. It had not. You tried to use your mountain climbing analogy to say that because the last report was negative that must mean the trend was down. THAT is where you completely and utterly FAILED in your analogy. I tried to point it out to you and you respond by compounding your ignorance with stupidity.

As I stated, your little ambulance chasing background has not prepared you in the least to discuss economics. You clearly have no comprehension of the topic. I know you will now continue to desperately spin your way out of this, but everyone on this board can read the links to the LEI monthly reports that I provided for you. Only a brain dead moron wouldn't be able to comprehend the FACT that you are 100% wrong.